"O ye who believe! Be steadfast witnesses for Allah in equity, and let not hatred of any people seduce you that ye deal not justly. Deal justly, that is nearer to your duty. Observe your duty to Allah. Lo! Allah is Informed of what ye do." [Al-maeda ,8]

One of the best speeches in the history of National Assembly of Pakistan. In this Imran Khan covered topics ranging from war, economic losses, humanitarian losses, talks and blocking NATO supplies on 20th November.

It is remarkable to see the colors of hypocrisy in different societies. One such example can be seen in the home of world’s so called the best democracy in the world i.e. United Kingdom. On one hand they preach concepts of freedom and democracy to the whole world and even bomb them to achieve these objectives and on the other hand they punish teenage boy Azhar Ahmed for just writing some facebook message against the soldiers of British Army.

Freedom of speech should come with sense of exercising responsibility. If people cannot tolerate that their parents, children or relatives are insulted in public then how can they demand Muslims to tolerate any thing insulting towards a personality who is many times more respectable than parents. But protestors should also know that violent protests are not a way to protest and what happened in Libya is also against Islam. It seems some pro-war lobby ignited the fire to fuel more hatred and clashes between civilizations. We should not fall into their traps and the best way I find is to simply ignore these retards or if some people want to protest then they should keep it peaceful.

The attack on Libyan embassy and brutal murder of an unarmed ambassador is totally against Islam. Shame on those who did this. If the protest was against the insult of Islam then this action has brought more insult than the video. We should show discomfort at the promotion of hatred among different religions and cultures but without committing more hate actions during the protests. The best way to condemn the work of those film makers is not to fall into their trap of creating more clashes among religions. Reacting violently to the actions of some moron is like playing in their hands. No matter how much these evil minds try to insult Prophet (S.A.W), they will not be able to reduce his stature as the most respectable human being of all times.

We condemn the movie against Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W). We also condemn the murder of unarmed diplomats in Libya.

People in their ignorance demand PTA and PEMRA to exercise ban on unwanted or inappropriate content but these people don’t know or don’t want to know that this paves way for their unwanted control on the media and freedom of expression. They are testing it on Twitter today. If you think some channel is showing something inappropriate then don’t watch it or do protest against it or file a law suit instead of relying on PEMRA and if you think some website content is in appropriate then don’t visit the link or pay some hacker to hack it instead of relying on PTA. PTA and PEMRA are a tool of state totalitarianism.

Today PTA has blocked twitter in Pakistan and it seems they are planning for something worst. It seems state terrorists are afraid that like in Arab spring people will use social media to support a movement of change which is evident in future.

Recent government decision has an interesting timing. Just as when momentum has started to build-up against the decision of imperialist pet Pakistani government and military to restore NATO supply, they blocked twitter to slow down the momentum. This is how any evil government works after their evil actions. They think by suppressing free speech, they can suppress free thought.

LONDON: Cricketer turned politician Imran Khan called Thursday for the army to withdraw from Pakistan’s tribal areas and for talks with the Taliban, warning that the country faced “catastrophe” otherwise.

Khan said the US-Pakistan military offensive in the areas bordering Afghanistan was turning locals massively against the United States and boosting support for the militants.

US drone strikes on militants were sparking “anger and hatred” in the area, said Khan, who leads the marginal Tehrik-e-Insaf (Movement for Justice).

“The solution is to hold a dialogue with the militants,” he told an audience at the Chatham House foreign policy thinktank in London.

“The solution is to win them onto our side, not to bomb them with airstrikes.” Otherwise, he warned: “If we continue with this military operation we are facing a catastrophe.”

The militants operating in the tribal areas did not share the beliefs of the Afghan Taliban, who wanted to create an Islamist state, he said.

“In my opinion, they are political Taliban, they are not religious Taliban.”

“They will fade away as soon as the Pakistan army moves back and dialogue is held,” he added.

Khan said that Pakistan’s former military ruler Pervez Musharraf once described him as “a terrorist without a beard” for suggesting talks with the militants, but now it was an idea being promoted by others.

“Now even (Afghan President) Hamid Karzai considers (Taliban supreme leader) Mullah Omar to be a brother,” Khan added, to laughter from the audience.

He also criticised the tactics of the US military surge in Afghanistan.

“The only way I see the surge being effective is if they use their muscle to get the Taliban to the negotiating table.”

“If they use the surge for more bloodshed, I can guarantee they will leave behind — because they will leave — a far more radical government than the one it replaced.”

A US drone strike in the lawless northwest border area Thursday targeted Pakistani Taliban leader Hakimullah Mehsud, officials said, although the militia denied reports that he was among 10 killed. –AFP

The world has not yet come out of the medieval suppression when people either got killed or get imprisoned for life if they are found guilty for exercising their freedom and criticize the monarchs but this time it has taken a leap and taken a new form of national security policies.

Secret agencies in the name of national security can suppress anyone’s rights and freedom.

Civil society in USA should take a serious note of these events where innocent people like
Dr. Aafia and her children or old journalists like Nayyar Zaidi become easy targets of the
parallel governments in the for security agencies. The prime reasons are similar in these cases
either speaking for justice, belonging to particular race or religion or it can be the case
of just fitting in the profile.

Recent event is of an Indian blogger who was jailed for just making anti-bush remarks over the
internet.

Vikram with a highly educated background was pursuing PhD in cancer research and holds an
excellent academic record.

Civil society and human rights organizations of the world particularly of USA should
demand justice for these victims.

———————————————————————————————————————–

Student jailed indefinitely over alleged anti-Bush remark

Internet crime is rapidly becoming a major focus for authorities around the world, but the case of an Indian student, jailed in the US nearly three years ago, is being seen as a major test of human rights in the country.

He was locked up for allegedly threatening the American president George W. Bush via his internet blog.

Before ending up in prison in 2006, Vikram Buddhi was an award-winning student at Purdue University in the United States, pursuing a double PhD in cancer research. His parents in India have been trying to prove his innocence for over three years.

“On February 3, 2006, the Secret Service made a formal report saying Vikram Buddhi is not a threat to the US President or any Secret Service protectees,” says the student’s father Dr. Buddhi Kota Subbarao. “Suddenly, on April 14, they arrest him. There is no new development between these dates. So having said he’s not a threat, how he could become a threat in April 2006?”

Dr. Subbarao is a retired Navy captain and nuclear scientist. His son was eventually found guilty formally, in 2007, of threatening the US President. However, the length of sentence has still not been announced and, without that, the family cannot appeal. Dr. Subbarao believes the entire trial was a miscarriage of justice.

Dr. Subbarao and his son

“The jury was not informed of the law, the defense attorney was told to shut up, and the jury’s questions explaining their confusion – the judge didn’t want to clear the confusion, so the jury got fed up and said guilty,” goes on Dr. Subbarao, “So all these show the trial is unfair, a mistrial must be declared.”

Vikram, 37, is accused of starting a web discussion, calling on Iraqis to take revenge on the US by attacking President George W. Bush. Vikram’s supporters believe he is innocent, because the internet trail does not prove he posted the message.

“He’s been accused of threatening to kill President Bush. How did he threaten – did he buy a weapon, did he write a letter ‘I want to kill you’, did he buy a ticket to Washington DC? What did he do?” demands the student’s lawyer Somnath Bharti.

In fact, Vikram’s family believes that he was targeted because a few months earlier he had publicly spoken out against possible racial discrimination at Indiana’s Purdue University. Vikram defended the case of a black student who was expelled for cheating, by highlighting the fact that three white students, guilty of the same act, were not.

Lawyer Somnath Bharti is sure that “Vikram is an outstanding student who stood against injustice, somebody who speaks up, and such people are not liked.”

Meanwhile, teachers and students of the elite Indian Institute of Technology are demanding the release of Vikram, a former student. They want the Indian government to put pressure on the American administration to look at the legality of the trial.

“The government has done nothing for this boy. Even the basic minimum that should have been done for an Indian citizen who is an alien abroad,” points out student Vijaya M.J. “We’re actually dealing with the US which is supposed to be a friendly country right now. When we have [Barack] Obama and Manmohan [Singh, Indian Prime Minister] shaking hands, and one of our students, completely in an unjust way being arrested and jailed in the US is completely unacceptable.”

They argue web postings are protected by the First Amendment of the US constitution that defends the right to freedom of speech.

“Even though so much is written about the rule of law and freedom of speech, [Americans] in fact live in a great deal of fear. Not only from terrorists, but also from their own security departments. Now, anybody who says anything about the American [president] will face the same fate,” Dr. Subbarao says.

What started out as two concerned parents demanding justice for their son is fast becoming an important precedent for the very nature of free speech in contemporary America. For a nation that prides itself on basic human rights and often lectures those who do not comply, it could soon face tough questions over its own laws of liberty.